said by kalphearion :

Cable CO's will never provide "a-la-carte" service. yes it will save the consume some cash, but it won't profit for the greedy cable exec's.

a la carte will never happen, unless Hell freezes over and cable exec's grow a heart and cater to the end users' wants.

said by Zoly :

What really needs to be done is adding a new TV rating like REL (religion) so customers can block it on their cable or whatever boxes. And then everyone will be happy.

said by Zoly :

I'm very surprised! In such religious country as USA televangelists are worried??? Just relax, a Bible belt will pay as much as needed to keep those channels alive.

said by mr4july :

What maks these "televangelist's" think that people watch these channels just because they are there......

said by Maarvin :

Cable companies are in the business of making money, and that is all. They will even rob us if they can. No.."a la carte" will never happen.

said by anonpronman :

And Finally why would they do this if there wasn't a benefit for them. This will not help the consumer . Ok maybe it will help the people that no longer care for their children and leave the child's raising to the government.

said by cdru :

Every digital cable box and satellite recevier that I've come across has the ability to lock out either entire channels or programming based on content or rating. But of course for the religious right, that isn't good enough. Parents obviously shouldn't have to actually set limits for their children...it should be done for them.

said by packetscan :

Rather Than "a la carte" why not just make a Tv with a V-chip in it so that parents can control access.. Oh that's right that plan failed miserably and you guessed it we all paid for it. (It's obvious that it has failed other wise we wouldn't be discussing this.)

Direct Tv has 3-4 different packages..
Why not add another one that is the "decency package"

This is Just another way for media outlets to rape the customer.

said by mabus :

i'd rather watch infomericals anyways... listening to some blow-hard try to shove their beliefs down my throat via a one-way medium is just plain wrong no matter how you look at it.

said by the article :

"We don't just want to preach to the choir; we want to reach the unchurched," said Paul Crouch Jr. of Trinity Broadcast Network in Santa Ana. "The bottom line is that we want to be everywhere on cable."

said by the article :

But Winters contends that religious broadcasters oppose more cable choice because they "are very fearful of losing any market share."

said by ctceo :

If they want to do something right then they need to create the "Commercial Channels" All commercials All the time.

said by CableTool :

Great Idea! We should do that with radio to!
Hold me close as our economy as we know it crumbles into a third world country!
Such a visionary.

said by ssj4android :

Not even Christians really. They just ask for money and push the button on the clap machine. Yuck.

said by Combat Chuck :

Televangelists serve a very small community, those who can't go to church and feel guilty about it, and those who don't want to go to church but feel guilty about it.

said by AquaBlaze :

So is Jesus supposed to fly out of your set and bless you or something? I thought going to church was part-&-part of the package.

I was not aware that the path towards salvation was in the boob tube.

said by Combat Chuck :

My whole point was no one is watching televangelists except for those who feel guilty about not going to Church and use it as a poor substitute; kinda like feeling guilty about ordering a Big Mac and ordering a Diet Coke instead of just not ordering the Big Mac in the first place.

said by radarman :

Way to generalize there, fella. I guess all the atheists are just out to give Christians a hard time too.

said by radarman :

Sure, there are some a$$hat$ out there that exist solely to make money for themselves, but they are not the majority. Most people recognize them for what they are, though admittedly not all. Most Christians despise these clowns as much as you do.

said by radarman :

Most ministries, though, are really trying to do exactly what they say they are. I have personally been involved in a "large" TV ministry that was serious about their message, and they went well above and beyond the accepted accounting practices - to the point where each church member received a yearly report detailing the finances of the church. Sure, they could have lied in the report, but they didn't HAVE to print it in the first place.

said by radarman :

As for the ala-carte - the idea is that most people who don't attend church won't order a religious channel. As it is, a lot of people "happen" on a religious channel accidentally, and are exposed to the message. Some choose to listen, most probably keep flipping. It's your remote, it's your choice. However, it isn't just Christians that are bothered by the idea of ala-carte.

said by radarman :

Even if you disagree with the televangelists, I think you will find ala-carte to not be the great paradise of TV viewing you think it will. I suspect strongly you will find your cable bill going up, not down - and your choices shrinking, not expanding. Most channels barely break even, and a lot of channels that are worthwhile depend on subsidies from larger channels.

Newer channels, for example, often don't start making money for 4 or 5 years. Look at Sci-Fi for example. It's been around for quite a while, but only recently started really becoming a force on Cable and Sat. For several years, it was in danger of getting cut - because it was felt that the "Trekkie" crowd was too small. Now that they have survived the lean times, they are actually producing sci-fi movies and shows. In an ala-carte world, they would have never gotten off of the ground.

said by radarman :

Basically, in your world of "choice", our choices would shrink to the current three networks, ESPN, MTV, VH1 (which itself was a derivative) and maybe some of the bigger niche markets, like HGTV and SCI-FI. There would be few new channels created, because they couldn't last long enough to be discovered. The few channels that DO get created will be derivatives, and suck just as bad as the originals. Imagine VH2, VH3, ... VHn.

Bundling of channels promotes creativity, by subsidizing fresh content with revenue from popular channels. Yes, ESPN and MTV helped to create VH1, BET, SCI-FI, TLC, HGTV, and a whole myriad of specialty channels.

said by radarman :

Of course, I suppose you could go with the HBO, Showtime, and Cinemax angle. Those are virtually ala-carte now, in that you can choose to pay for each separately in most markets. They have fresh content, and produce a lot of original movies - and guess what, they jack your bill up by about $20 per channel. That, my friend, is the future of ala-carte.

said by radarman :

But hey, I'm a Je$u$ freak, so what do I know?

said by Taranis :

And what about Pat Robertson, Robert Tilton, Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Bakker and Oral Roberts? Con artists hiding behind the Bible.

said by Bill :

I'm assuming they think people may flip through the channels and come across their's and keep watching it and be converted.

said by LiamJunket :

All the religious channels, shopping channels, and other ilk should be paying the cable companies to carry them. Maybe that is the way it works.

said by cableties :

Whatever happened to Separation of Church and State?

said by cableties :

Since when can content providers dictate the FCC, especially religious zealots bent on their own fiscal preservation?

said by Hardcore :

The evangelists want to spread the message of Christ.

said by Taranis :

Looks like quite a profit they make for a non-profit organization, don't you think?